Dear Emma,
I believe that there are a lot of problems with the use of 'person with
a disability'. First of all, the tendency is for the term 'disability'
to signify both 'impairment' and 'disability'. Moreover saying 'person
with a disability' indirectly implies that the person is the cause of
his/her problems. Admittedly, there may be merits to the argument of
'putting the person first' - used to justify the use of the term but it
still fails to voice the social forces that give rise to disability but
rather appears to simply address the cultural misperceptions about
disabled people by highlighting their personhood.
While addressing stereotypes is positive, it's not enough since it fails
to expose that we as disabled persons are both disabled through both
negative attitudes AND structural or institutional barriers. Having said
that, language places restrictions on the translatability of the term
'disabled person' and its empowering and political message. For
instance, in my native language, the term 'disabled persons' as a direct
translation would result in an an offensive term roughly translating to
the phrase 'the disabled'. Instead, we use the American version 'persons
with a disability' or "persuni b'dizabilita'".
However, in English publications, I always use British social model
terminology throughout and use 'impairment' when I need to refer to the
actual impairment. However, whatever the terminology you prefer using,
it's important to be consistent about it. I've read many EU reports
where both terms are used interchangeably which makes it difficult to
decide what is actually being discussed - whether impairment or
disability.
Best,
Gordon
In this case, certain
On Tue, 10 Mar 2009 00:01:57 +0000, "DISABILITY-RESEARCH automatic
digest system" <[log in to unmask]> said:
> There are 8 messages totalling 932 lines in this issue.
>
> Topics of the day:
>
> 1. Vacancy - Research Assistant Position for African Policy on
> Disability and
> Development (A-PODD)
> 2. Terminology: disabled students v students with disabilities? (7)
>
> ________________End of message________________
>
> This Disability-Research Discussion list is managed by the Centre for
> Disability Studies at the University of Leeds
> (www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies).
> Enquiries about list administration should be sent to
> [log in to unmask]
>
> Archives and tools are located at:
> www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
> You can VIEW, POST, JOIN and LEAVE the list by logging in to this web
> page.
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2009 10:41:41 +0200
> From: "Chataika, T, Dr <[log in to unmask]>" <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Vacancy - Research Assistant Position for African Policy on
> Disability and Development (A-PODD)
>
> Vacancy - Research Assistant Position for African Policy on Disability =
> and Development (A-PODD)
> =20
> Application Deadline: 13 March , 2009
>
> A-PODD has a Research Assistantship position for 1 Year, and the =
> candidate has to be from Sierra Leone. We seek a person with =
> experience in researching disability issues for the above position. The
> =
> project is housed at the Centre for Rehabilitation Studies, Stellenbosch
> =
> University, South Africa, and the Centre for Global Health, Trinity =
> College Dublin and The Secretariat of the African Decade for Persons =
> with Disability, being other partners. =20
> =20
> The Research Assistant should have a degree in a relevant social or =
> health science, or evidence of operating at an equivalent level. The =
> Research Assistant will be considered for fully-funded registration for =
> a Masters in Research at Stellenbsoch University. Limited travel to =
> South Africa will be required, with the Research Assistant based in =
> Sierra Leone. =20
> =20
> This is a re-advertisement as only two applicants with the relevant =
> qualifications have been shorted listed. We need 3 interviewees so that =
> we have a wide selection. The teleconferencing interview will take place
> =
> on the 19th April 2009. People with disabilities are encouraged to =
> apply.
> =20
> Project Description
> A-PODD is a three year project funded by the (Irish) Health Research =
> Board and Irish Aid. A-PODD is led by Prof Mac MacLachlan, Centre for =
> Global Health and School of Psychology, Trinity College Dublin; Ms =
> Gubela Mji, Centre for Rehabilitation Studies, Stellenbosch University, =
> South Africa, and Mr A.K. Dube, The Secretariat of the African Decade =
> for Persons with Disability.
> =20
> This research investigates how disability can be put on the agenda of =
> national and international development initiatives. It focuses on how =
> research evidence can be utilised to inform the policy environment (such
> =
> as PRSPs and SWAps), development institutions (such as the IMF, World =
> Bank and WHO), as well as less formal local, community and grass-roots =
> decision making and inclusion efforts.=20
> =20
> A-PODD will undertake four country case studies: in Sierra Leone, a =
> country emerging from conflict that resulted in many people being =
> disabled; Malawi and Uganda, the only two African countries that have =
> Ministries for people with disabilities; and Ethiopia, the second most =
> populous country in Africa, with significant geographical barriers and a
> =
> highly dispersed population, presenting significant challenges to the =
> inclusion of people with disability.
>
> Our comparative analysis will inform disability policy and =
> implementation within the region. Barriers and facilitators will be =
> identified along implementation pathways, and so too will local means =
> and mechanisms of addressing these. Country reports will be discussed at
> =
> a concluding workshop to which governments, civil society, donors, =
> researchers and others will be invited. A code of best practice will be =
> drawn up for Moving Evidence to Action on African Disability Policy.
> =20
> Other collaborating partners on this project are:
> =20
> International Partners:
> Department of Psychology at Stellenbosch University
> Southern African Federation of the Disabled
> Ministry of Persons with Disabilities and the Elderly, Government of =
> Malawi
> Human Sciences Research Council, South Africa
> South African Medical Research Council's Cochrane Centre
> SINTEF Health Research (Norway)
> World Bank
> =20
> Irish Partners:
> Institute for Nursing Research, University of Ulster Law & Policy =
> Research Unit, NUI Galway.=20
> National Institute for Intellectual Disability, Trinity College Dublin=20
> Department of Economics, Trinity College Dublin.
> =20
> Bursary
> Research Assistants will be appointed in the range EUR8,000-10,000 =
> (Euro)
> =20
> Applications
> Interested applicants should send=20
> 1) A statement of interest - 1 page
> 2) A Curriculum Vitae -=20
> 3) Contact details for at least two referees (at least one of which =
> should be an academic).
> =20
> For any quiries, please do not hesitate to contact me.
> =20
> Please forward your application to:
>
> Dr Tsitsi Chataika (Post doctoral Research Fellow)
> E-mail: [log in to unmask] =
> <[log in to unmask]" target="_blank">http:[log in to unmask]> =20
> =20
> Dr Tsitsi Chataika - Postdoctoral Research Fellow
> Stellenbosch University
> Tygerberg Campus
> Faculty of Health Science
> Centre for Rehabilitation Studies
> African Policy On Disability and Development (A-PODD) Project
> P.O Box 7505
> Tygerberg, 7505
> South Africa
> Tel: +27 219389816 (office)
> +27 7764085148 (Cell/Mobile)
> Fax:+27 219146875
>
> Quote of the Week: Don't ever take a fence down until you know the =
> reason why it was put up - G. K. Chesterton =20
> =20
>
> =20
>
> ________________End of message________________
>
> This Disability-Research Discussion list is managed by the Centre for
> Disability Studies at the University of Leeds
> (www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies).
> Enquiries about list administration should be sent to
> [log in to unmask]
>
> Archives and tools are located at:
> www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
> You can VIEW, POST, JOIN and LEAVE the list by logging in to this web
> page.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2009 16:40:38 +0000
> From: Emma Rowlett <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Terminology: disabled students v students with disabilities?
>
> Apologies for cross posting...
>
> When I started at University in 1999 the common term in use was
> 'students with disabilities' (e.g. NUS SWD Officer) and I was told
> that the idea behind this was putting the 'student' first (I don't
> remember who told me this!). I know there has been a move away from
> this in many places as "it implies that we =E2=80=98own=E2=80=99 the
> disabi=
> lity, while
> it is society which disables us" (according to Lorraine Gradwell in "A
> rose by any other name=E2=80=A6" -
> http://www.healthmatters.org.uk/issue32/arose).
>
> Do any of you know of any other literature about this, particularly
> where 'students with disabilities' came from and why? Anything that
> references disabled people versus people with disabilities is also
> useful. I need to write about this in my thesis, but I also co-edit
> the "Students with Disabilities Series" in MSOR Connections and I am
> considering making a case for changing the name.
>
> Also, if you have any opinions about the two terms I'd like to hear from
> yo=
> u.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Emma
>
> --=20
> Emma Jane Rowlett (n=C3=A9e Wright)
> School of Sociology and Social Policy
> University of Nottingham
>
> [log in to unmask]
>
> www.accessingmaterials.org.uk
>
> ________________End of message________________
>
> This Disability-Research Discussion list is managed by the Centre for
> Disability Studies at the University of Leeds
> (www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies).
> Enquiries about list administration should be sent to
> [log in to unmask]
>
> Archives and tools are located at:
> www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
> You can VIEW, POST, JOIN and LEAVE the list by logging in to this web
> page.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2009 18:25:57 -0000
> From: Larry Arnold <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Terminology: disabled students v students with disabilities?
>
> Person first language is patronising and disabling language in my =
> opinion. The issue seems to be resolved in the UK so far as I know in =
> favour of disabled people, that is to say the disability is an active =
> disempowering process rather than a personal faculty.
>
> If I wanted to disable my computer I would throw a spanner at it, and it
> =
> would then be a computer with a disability would it? it would be =
> knackered, done in, wrecked. The disabling process lies not within the =
> individual, though of course negative attribution styles borne of false =
> consciousness and indoctrination can well contribute to ones own =
> assisted suicide whether actual or political.
>
> I may be a person with a flute at times, but not everyone who is a =
> person with a flute can be a flautist. It's what you do with it that =
> matters :)
>
> Larry
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: The Disability-Research Discussion List [mailto:DISABILITY-
> > [log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Emma Rowlett
> > Sent: 09 March 2009 16:41
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Terminology: disabled students v students with disabilities?
> >=20
> > Apologies for cross posting...
> >=20
> > When I started at University in 1999 the common term in use was
> > 'students with disabilities' (e.g. NUS SWD Officer) and I was told
> > that the idea behind this was putting the 'student' first (I don't
> > remember who told me this!). I know there has been a move away from
> > this in many places as "it implies that we =E2=80=98own=E2=80=99 the =
> disability, while
> > it is society which disables us" (according to Lorraine Gradwell in "A
> > rose by any other name=E2=80=A6" -
> > http://www.healthmatters.org.uk/issue32/arose).
> >=20
> > Do any of you know of any other literature about this, particularly
> > where 'students with disabilities' came from and why? Anything that
> > references disabled people versus people with disabilities is also
> > useful. I need to write about this in my thesis, but I also co-edit
> > the "Students with Disabilities Series" in MSOR Connections and I am
> > considering making a case for changing the name.
> >=20
> > Also, if you have any opinions about the two terms I'd like to hear =
> from you.
> >=20
> > Thanks,
> >=20
> > Emma
> >=20
> > --
> > Emma Jane Rowlett (n=C3=A9e Wright)
> > School of Sociology and Social Policy
> > University of Nottingham
> >=20
> > [log in to unmask]
> >=20
> > www.accessingmaterials.org.uk
> >=20
> > ________________End of message________________
> >=20
> > This Disability-Research Discussion list is managed by the Centre for =
> Disability Studies at
> > the University of Leeds (www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies).
> > Enquiries about list administration should be sent to =
> disability-research-
> > [log in to unmask]
> >=20
> > Archives and tools are located at:
> > www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
> > You can VIEW, POST, JOIN and LEAVE the list by logging in to this web =
> page.
>
> ________________End of message________________
>
> This Disability-Research Discussion list is managed by the Centre for
> Disability Studies at the University of Leeds
> (www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies).
> Enquiries about list administration should be sent to
> [log in to unmask]
>
> Archives and tools are located at:
> www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
> You can VIEW, POST, JOIN and LEAVE the list by logging in to this web
> page.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2009 14:58:42 -0400
> From: Jason Ellis <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Terminology: disabled students v students with disabilities?
>
> This is a very interesting question. Two of the disadvantages of the
> phr=
> asing
> "person with a disability" are that it's awkward to write (not concise)
> a=
> nd it
> limits one's prose options somewhat. That said, I respect the
> imperative=
> to
> use language in my scholarship that people with disabilities deem
> appropr=
> iate
> and representative; "nothing about us without us" is important in this
> se=
> nse
> too. So now I'm most intrigued now about what kind of alternatives, or
> b=
> est
> practices, others use in their writing. Any tips and tricks you might
> su=
> ggest?
> Thanks
> Jason.
> --=20
> Jason Ellis
> Ph.D. candidate,
> Department of History, York University
> [log in to unmask]
>
>
> Quoting Larry Arnold <[log in to unmask]>:
>
> > Person first language is patronising and disabling language in my opini=
> on.
> > The issue seems to be resolved in the UK so far as I know in favour of
> > disabled people, that is to say the disability is an active disempoweri=
> ng
> > process rather than a personal faculty.
> >
> > If I wanted to disable my computer I would throw a spanner at it, and i=
> t
> > would then be a computer with a disability would it? it would be knacke=
> red,
> > done in, wrecked. The disabling process lies not within the individual,
> > though of course negative attribution styles borne of false consciousne=
> ss and
> > indoctrination can well contribute to ones own assisted suicide whether
> > actual or political.
> >
> > I may be a person with a flute at times, but not everyone who is a pers=
> on
> > with a flute can be a flautist. It's what you do with it that matters :=
> )
> >
> > Larry
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: The Disability-Research Discussion List [mailto:DISABILITY-
> > > [log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Emma Rowlett
> > > Sent: 09 March 2009 16:41
> > > To: [log in to unmask]
> > > Subject: Terminology: disabled students v students with disabilities?
> > >
> > > Apologies for cross posting...
> > >
> > > When I started at University in 1999 the common term in use was
> > > 'students with disabilities' (e.g. NUS SWD Officer) and I was told
> > > that the idea behind this was putting the 'student' first (I don't
> > > remember who told me this!). I know there has been a move away from
> > > this in many places as "it implies that we =E2=80=98own=E2=80=99 the =
> disability, while
> > > it is society which disables us" (according to Lorraine Gradwell in "=
> A
> > > rose by any other name=E2=80=A6" -
> > > http://www.healthmatters.org.uk/issue32/arose).
> > >
> > > Do any of you know of any other literature about this, particularly
> > > where 'students with disabilities' came from and why? Anything that
> > > references disabled people versus people with disabilities is also
> > > useful. I need to write about this in my thesis, but I also co-edit
> > > the "Students with Disabilities Series" in MSOR Connections and I am
> > > considering making a case for changing the name.
> > >
> > > Also, if you have any opinions about the two terms I'd like to hear f=
> rom
> > you.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Emma
> > >
> > > --
> > > Emma Jane Rowlett (n=C3=A9e Wright)
> > > School of Sociology and Social Policy
> > > University of Nottingham
> > >
> > > [log in to unmask]
> > >
> > > www.accessingmaterials.org.uk
> > >
> > > ________________End of message________________
> > >
> > > This Disability-Research Discussion list is managed by the Centre for
> > Disability Studies at
> > > the University of Leeds (www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies).
> > > Enquiries about list administration should be sent to disability-rese=
> arch-
> > > [log in to unmask]
> > >
> > > Archives and tools are located at:
> > > www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
> > > You can VIEW, POST, JOIN and LEAVE the list by logging in to this web=
> page.
> >
> > ________________End of message________________
> >
> > This Disability-Research Discussion list is managed by the Centre for
> > Disability Studies at the University of Leeds
> > (www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies).
> > Enquiries about list administration should be sent to
> > [log in to unmask]
> >
> > Archives and tools are located at:
> > www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
> > You can VIEW, POST, JOIN and LEAVE the list by logging in to this web p=
> age.
> >
> >
>
> ________________End of message________________
>
> This Disability-Research Discussion list is managed by the Centre for
> Disability Studies at the University of Leeds
> (www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies).
> Enquiries about list administration should be sent to
> [log in to unmask]
>
> Archives and tools are located at:
> www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
> You can VIEW, POST, JOIN and LEAVE the list by logging in to this web
> page.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2009 15:35:56 -0400
> From: Andrea Shettle <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Terminology: disabled students v students with disabilities?
>
> In my own blog site (We Can Do, http://wecando.wordpress.com) I try
> to=20=
>
> alternate between "people with disabilities" and "disabled people."
>
> This is because people in different countries seem to have different=20
> preferences. The preference for "disabled people" as far as I can=20
> detect seems to be very dominantly and almost uniquely a British/UK=20
> phenomenon that I don't think I have really seen elsewhere. In the
> US=20=
>
> and in Spanish speaking countries, the preference is very clearly for=20
> "people with disabilities" ("personas con discapacidades" in Spanish).
>
> I have found that people from the UK sometimes misperceive this as=20
> meaning that the social model has not caught on elsewhere, or is not=20
> understood elsewhere. This is false. Please do not confuse
> LINGUISTIC=20=
>
> choices with the MODEL of disability that you are accustomed to=20
> associating with them (whatever your cultural context). We DO very=20
> much have the social model in the US, in that it is very much=20
> understood by most members of the disability community here that most=20
> of our barriers to participation in society come from barriers in the=20
> environment, rather than in our impairments. This understanding has=20
> formed a critical basis for much of the advocacy movement here and
> has=20=
>
> informed some of the more enlightened legislation, such as the=20
> Americans with Disabilities Act (equivalent of the UK Disabilities=20
> Discrimination Act). It's just that much of the language that we
> have=20=
>
> developed around the discussion of these concepts has evolved along a=20
> different path than it did in the UK. (Sometime it might be=20
> fascinating and enlightening if someone more knowledgeable in both=20
> cultures were to do a historical and etymological investigation of
> how=20=
>
> and why this came about...perhaps something co-written and=20
> co-researched by one US researcher and one UK researcher ... but I=20
> digress).
>
> In the US, the emphasis is on "person first" language -- the idea
> being=20=
>
> that the PERSON is more important than the impairment. Except that,=20
> some people perceive the word "impairment" itself to be offensive, as=20
> if suggesting that the person themselves is "impaired" for having an=20
> impairment. The word "disabled" is also considered very offensive
> in=20=
>
> many US circles. It is simply not interpreted as being connected to=20
> disabling factors in the environment, as it is in the UK. In the US=20
> context, "disabled" typically carries the connotation that the person=20
> him/herself is impaired, incapable, etc., and that the=20
> impairment/disability takes precedence over being a person. Thus, it=20
> is perceived as a very dehumanizing term. So, many Americans with=20
> disabilities find the term "disabled" about as abhorrent as many=20
> disabled UK people find the term "people with disabilities."
>
> Personally, I understand the philosophy behind both terms well enough=20
> to feel comfortable using either one . When writing for a=20
> predominantly British audience, I typically use "disabled people" and=20
> have no qualms about that. When writing for predominantly US=20
> audiences, I use "people with disabilities," and for international=20
> audiences I try to remember to use both in alternation.
>
> I agree that "disabled people" is shorter and easier to write. For=20
> international audiences, I do sometimes tend to use that a little
> more=20=
>
> often just because of that.
>
> Andrea Shettle, MSW
> [log in to unmask]
> http://wecando.wordpress.com
>
>
> On Mar 9, 2009, at 2:58 PM, Jason Ellis wrote:
>
> > This is a very interesting question. Two of the disadvantages of the=20=
>
> > phrasing
> > "person with a disability" are that it's awkward to write (not=20
> > concise) and it
> > limits one's prose options somewhat. That said, I respect the=20
> > imperative to
> > use language in my scholarship that people with disabilities deem=20
> > appropriate
> > and representative; "nothing about us without us" is important in this=20=
>
> > sense
> > too. So now I'm most intrigued now about what kind of alternatives,=20=
>
> > or best
> > practices, others use in their writing. Any tips and tricks you might=20=
>
> > suggest?
> > Thanks
> > Jason.
> > --=20
> > Jason Ellis
> > Ph.D. candidate,
> > Department of History, York University
> > [log in to unmask]
> >
> >
> > Quoting Larry Arnold <[log in to unmask]>:
> >
> >> Person first language is patronising and disabling language in my=20
> >> opinion.
> >> The issue seems to be resolved in the UK so far as I know in favour =
> of
> >> disabled people, that is to say the disability is an active=20
> >> disempowering
> >> process rather than a personal faculty.
> >>
> >> If I wanted to disable my computer I would throw a spanner at it, and=20=
>
> >> it
> >> would then be a computer with a disability would it? it would be=20
> >> knackered,
> >> done in, wrecked. The disabling process lies not within the=20
> >> individual,
> >> though of course negative attribution styles borne of false=20
> >> consciousness and
> >> indoctrination can well contribute to ones own assisted suicide=20
> >> whether
> >> actual or political.
> >>
> >> I may be a person with a flute at times, but not everyone who is a=20
> >> person
> >> with a flute can be a flautist. It's what you do with it that matters=20=
>
> >> :)
> >>
> >> Larry
> >>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: The Disability-Research Discussion List [mailto:DISABILITY-
> >>> [log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Emma Rowlett
> >>> Sent: 09 March 2009 16:41
> >>> To: [log in to unmask]
> >>> Subject: Terminology: disabled students v students with =
> disabilities?
> >>>
> >>> Apologies for cross posting...
> >>>
> >>> When I started at University in 1999 the common term in use was
> >>> 'students with disabilities' (e.g. NUS SWD Officer) and I was told
> >>> that the idea behind this was putting the 'student' first (I don't
> >>> remember who told me this!). I know there has been a move away from
> >>> this in many places as "it implies that we =E2=80=98own=E2=80=99 the =
> disability,=20
> >>> while
> >>> it is society which disables us" (according to Lorraine Gradwell in=20=
>
> >>> "A
> >>> rose by any other name=E2=80=A6" -
> >>> http://www.healthmatters.org.uk/issue32/arose).
> >>>
> >>> Do any of you know of any other literature about this, particularly
> >>> where 'students with disabilities' came from and why? Anything that
> >>> references disabled people versus people with disabilities is also
> >>> useful. I need to write about this in my thesis, but I also co-edit
> >>> the "Students with Disabilities Series" in MSOR Connections and I am
> >>> considering making a case for changing the name.
> >>>
> >>> Also, if you have any opinions about the two terms I'd like to hear=20=
>
> >>> from
> >> you.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>>
> >>> Emma
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Emma Jane Rowlett (n=C3=A9e Wright)
> >>> School of Sociology and Social Policy
> >>> University of Nottingham
> >>>
> >>> [log in to unmask]
> >>>
> >>> www.accessingmaterials.org.uk
> >>>
> >>> ________________End of message________________
> >>>
> >>> This Disability-Research Discussion list is managed by the Centre =
> for
> >> Disability Studies at
> >>> the University of Leeds (www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies).
> >>> Enquiries about list administration should be sent to=20
> >>> disability-research-
> >>> [log in to unmask]
> >>>
> >>> Archives and tools are located at:
> >>> www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
> >>> You can VIEW, POST, JOIN and LEAVE the list by logging in to this=20
> >>> web page.
> >>
> >> ________________End of message________________
> >>
> >> This Disability-Research Discussion list is managed by the Centre for
> >> Disability Studies at the University of Leeds
> >> (www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies).
> >> Enquiries about list administration should be sent to
> >> [log in to unmask]
> >>
> >> Archives and tools are located at:
> >> www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
> >> You can VIEW, POST, JOIN and LEAVE the list by logging in to this web=20=
>
> >> page.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > ________________End of message________________
> >
> > This Disability-Research Discussion list is managed by the Centre for=20=
>
> > Disability Studies at the University of Leeds=20
> > (www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies).
> > Enquiries about list administration should be sent to=20
> > [log in to unmask]
> >
> > Archives and tools are located at:
> > www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
> > You can VIEW, POST, JOIN and LEAVE the list by logging in to this web=20=
>
> > page.
> >
>
> ________________End of message________________
>
> This Disability-Research Discussion list is managed by the Centre for
> Disability Studies at the University of Leeds
> (www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies).
> Enquiries about list administration should be sent to
> [log in to unmask]
>
> Archives and tools are located at:
> www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
> You can VIEW, POST, JOIN and LEAVE the list by logging in to this web
> page.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2009 22:43:09 -0000
> From: Larry Arnold <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Terminology: disabled students v students with disabilities?
>
> Whose language is it anyway? PWD is a clumsy usage and says everything to
> me
> about what is and always was wrong with American Politics, no guts since
> they kicked the Brits out.
>
> I am not bending my language to suit the US dialect variation I think the
> US
> needs to appreciate that there *is* a difference in the way these things
> are
> expressed and just because it is acceptable on one side of the pond it is
> not acceptable world wide any more than second rate TV is - but that is
> another thing because we have plenty of our own nowadays :(
>
> Same Bollox about autism, but at least US autists are in the lead in
> reclaiming the right to call ourselves what we will. I have refused to
> conform with my Uni's PC bollox on this and write it the way I mean it.
>
> The UK did have the same infection of people first language a couple of
> decades ago too, for the same reasons, however some of us got over it.
>
> The problem for me is that this pseudo politeness is inflicted by the non
> disabled hegemony on us, it is a language from above and I will not have
> it.
>
> Damn it if an American cannot realise that I am UK English and writing UK
> English and adjust what is the world coming to. The rot is with the
> (expletives deleted) US academic publishers, if more than a few journals
> went out of print the world would not be less informed we would be freer,
> hopefully this recession will have some worthy casualties.
>
> Larry
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: The Disability-Research Discussion List [mailto:DISABILITY-
> > [log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Andrea Shettle
> > Sent: 09 March 2009 19:36
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: Terminology: disabled students v students with disabilities?
> >
> > In my own blog site (We Can Do, http://wecando.wordpress.com) I try to
> > alternate between "people with disabilities" and "disabled people."
> >
> > This is because people in different countries seem to have different
> > preferences. The preference for "disabled people" as far as I can
> > detect seems to be very dominantly and almost uniquely a British/UK
> > phenomenon that I don't think I have really seen elsewhere. In the US
> > and in Spanish speaking countries, the preference is very clearly for
> > "people with disabilities" ("personas con discapacidades" in Spanish).
> >
> > I have found that people from the UK sometimes misperceive this as
> > meaning that the social model has not caught on elsewhere, or is not
> > understood elsewhere. This is false. Please do not confuse LINGUISTIC
> > choices with the MODEL of disability that you are accustomed to
> > associating with them (whatever your cultural context). We DO very
> > much have the social model in the US, in that it is very much
> > understood by most members of the disability community here that most
> > of our barriers to participation in society come from barriers in the
> > environment, rather than in our impairments. This understanding has
> > formed a critical basis for much of the advocacy movement here and has
> > informed some of the more enlightened legislation, such as the
> > Americans with Disabilities Act (equivalent of the UK Disabilities
> > Discrimination Act). It's just that much of the language that we have
> > developed around the discussion of these concepts has evolved along a
> > different path than it did in the UK. (Sometime it might be
> > fascinating and enlightening if someone more knowledgeable in both
> > cultures were to do a historical and etymological investigation of how
> > and why this came about...perhaps something co-written and
> > co-researched by one US researcher and one UK researcher ... but I
> > digress).
> >
> > In the US, the emphasis is on "person first" language -- the idea being
> > that the PERSON is more important than the impairment. Except that,
> > some people perceive the word "impairment" itself to be offensive, as
> > if suggesting that the person themselves is "impaired" for having an
> > impairment. The word "disabled" is also considered very offensive in
> > many US circles. It is simply not interpreted as being connected to
> > disabling factors in the environment, as it is in the UK. In the US
> > context, "disabled" typically carries the connotation that the person
> > him/herself is impaired, incapable, etc., and that the
> > impairment/disability takes precedence over being a person. Thus, it
> > is perceived as a very dehumanizing term. So, many Americans with
> > disabilities find the term "disabled" about as abhorrent as many
> > disabled UK people find the term "people with disabilities."
> >
> > Personally, I understand the philosophy behind both terms well enough
> > to feel comfortable using either one . When writing for a
> > predominantly British audience, I typically use "disabled people" and
> > have no qualms about that. When writing for predominantly US
> > audiences, I use "people with disabilities," and for international
> > audiences I try to remember to use both in alternation.
> >
> > I agree that "disabled people" is shorter and easier to write. For
> > international audiences, I do sometimes tend to use that a little more
> > often just because of that.
> >
> > Andrea Shettle, MSW
> > [log in to unmask]
> > http://wecando.wordpress.com
> >
>
> ________________End of message________________
>
> This Disability-Research Discussion list is managed by the Centre for
> Disability Studies at the University of Leeds
> (www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies).
> Enquiries about list administration should be sent to
> [log in to unmask]
>
> Archives and tools are located at:
> www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
> You can VIEW, POST, JOIN and LEAVE the list by logging in to this web
> page.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2009 18:51:10 -0400
> From: Liz Depoy <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Terminology: disabled students v students with disabilities?
>
> Emma,
> Stephen Gilson and I wrote quite a bit about this issue in our 2004 book
> entitled Rethinking Disability ( Brooks Cole). Perhaps that work might
> help you in your thinking. We are now writing another book which will be
> published by Sage late in 2009.
> let me know if you want future discussion.
> Our work opposes person first language as euphemistic branding as it is
> only used when the condition that "follows" the personhood is so
> devalued that it cannot be used as a viable adjective. Interesting that
> we do not say person with beauty or
> even person with murderous behavior. Comparing person first lexicon with
> more typical parlance is axiologically revealing.
> Best wishes,
> Liz
>
> Elizabeth DePoy, Ph.D.
> Coordinator of Interdisciplinary Disability Studies
> Center for Community Inclusion and Disability Studies
> University of Maine
> 5717 Corbett Hall
> Orono, ME 04469
> 207-581-1469 (voice)
> 207-581-1084 (TTY)
> 207-581-1231 (FAX)
>
> ________________End of message________________
>
> This Disability-Research Discussion list is managed by the Centre for
> Disability Studies at the University of Leeds
> (www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies).
> Enquiries about list administration should be sent to
> [log in to unmask]
>
> Archives and tools are located at:
> www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
> You can VIEW, POST, JOIN and LEAVE the list by logging in to this web
> page.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2009 17:28:44 -0600
> From: Gregor Wolbring <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Terminology: disabled students v students with disabilities?
>
> Emma,
> as i see it it also depends on the meaning one employs for disability.
> If its used with the meaning impairment then it does not matter how one
> uses it
> as it does not matter whether one says defective person or person with a
> defect.
>
> as the problem lays with the classification of impairment/defect and
> what goes with it.
>
> If one uses disability to mean that one is disabled /hindered by social
> realities/ social structures/ by reaction of others towards ones
> body/functioning
>
>
> meaning
> for example
> 'person that is hindered by social realities'..
>
> or 'a by social realities hindered person'
>
> both are just fine
>
> the problem is not so much the order but how we use the term disability.
>
> When we use in North America the term like person with a learning
> disability
> we use the term disability with the meaning impairment/defect
>
> and that would not change if we would say a learning disabled person
>
>
>
> We do not use the term to mean person that is hindered in ones learning
> by how society set up the learning system/what is expected as an
> learning outcome.
>
>
> I see the person first debate as a red herring debate as it deflects
> from the misuse of the term disability with the meaning impairment and
> defect.
>
>
> We should use the term disability only if we want to highlight the
> social reality the discrimination towards a persons body/functioning
>
>
> If we want to highlight the body /functioning one has two options
>
> using impairment/defect (medical model)
>
> or variation (social model)
>
> I might have no legs (factual) and can not walk (factual) but I would
> never accept walking impairment/defect as a label for myself as that
> indicates in my eyes that i should be able to walk
>
> whereby I see myself as using alternative modes of movement
>
> so I reject both these labels for me 'person with a walking impairment'
> and 'walking impaired person'.
>
> and accept both of these 'person with a mode of movement variation'
> and 'a movement variable person'.
>
> (sounds awful but for illustration purposes you get the point)
>
> and I would accept disabled person or person with a disability if
> disabled reflect the meaning of negative social treatment and negative
> social environment.
>
> so only if both term highlight external parameters and are not a
> reflection on me.
>
>
> Now some might identify themselves as impaired/defective (and they might
> also encounter social disablement) .
>
> If that is the case the issue is whether one deals with their
> impairments or the social disablement first or both.
>
>
> But its not about whether someone is a person first or not. That does
> not solve the issue of impairment label or what remedy one focuses on.
>
>
> I generated a glossary here
> http://www.bioethicsanddisability.org/glossary.pdf
>
> Cheers
>
> Gregor
>
>
> Dr. Gregor Wolbring
> Assistant Professor
> University of Calgary
> webpage: http://www.bioethicsanddisability.org/
> Ableism and Ability Ethics and Governance blog:
> http://ableism.wordpress.com
> biweekly column The Choice is Yours:
> http://www.innovationwatch.com/commentary_choiceisyours.htm
> Nano Bio Info Cogno Synbio Blog:http://wolbring.wordpress.com/
> What Sorts of People blog: http://whatsortsofpeople.wordpress.com/
>
> ________________End of message________________
>
> This Disability-Research Discussion list is managed by the Centre for
> Disability Studies at the University of Leeds
> (www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies).
> Enquiries about list administration should be sent to
> [log in to unmask]
>
> Archives and tools are located at:
> www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
> You can VIEW, POST, JOIN and LEAVE the list by logging in to this web
> page.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of DISABILITY-RESEARCH Digest - 8 Mar 2009 to 9 Mar 2009 (#2009-60)
> ***********************************************************************
________
Gordon C. Cardona
e-mail: [log in to unmask]
MY BLOGS:
Gordon's D-Zone: http://gd-zone.blogspot.com
COSMOS ONLINE: http://CosmosOnline.blogspot.com
"All that is valuable in human society depends upon the opportunity for development accorded the individual"
Albert Einstein (1879 - 1955)
________________End of message________________
This Disability-Research Discussion list is managed by the Centre for Disability Studies at the University of Leeds (www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies).
Enquiries about list administration should be sent to [log in to unmask]
Archives and tools are located at:
www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
You can VIEW, POST, JOIN and LEAVE the list by logging in to this web page.
|
